Australian Members

[Selvaggio]

Re trouser width....Most of my suit trousers are about the same width - not slim and not full. In between.

I have never had odd trousers made up, nor (with one exception) tapered. They are what they are. In terms of preferences...I'm not of a build which makes sense for me to follow the current fashion for very slim trousers.

I think there is something to be said for the taking into account context and fabric in this. I have a few pairs of flannel trousers and am happy for them to be a fuller cut than regulr, especially the heavier and fuzzier (non-worsted - is there a more correct term?) weaves. These need cuffs, a proper break and a fairly wide leg for the whole Douglas Fairbanks Jnr effect. They have to drape from the waistband and swoosh a bit when you walk.

Having said that, my one exception mentioned earlier was a pair of very heavy, herringbone grey tweed slacks which were a typical RL flight of fancy. They were so wide they completely covered my shoe. Whilst I got the cultural refernce alright, they were just unwearable in practice. So I had them tapered - still full cut, but less cartoony.

 

[DartagnanRed]

Sadly the embrace of neo liberal economics, market driven outcomes and user pays mentality transformed students into consumers.

And the 'not with it club' is taking members.

There isn't some sort of neoliberal conspiracy. Public funded university funding is hugely expensive. Whitlam's free university age occured in a very different context, in which the numbers of people going to university were far smaller and the hit on the public purse was vastly smaller. Full public funding of university education in modern times would be impossible and not at all desirable given the masses of people who go to uni.

By forcing people to pay for their education (I believe the current split is something like 60/40 to the student), you force students to better choose the profession they will enter. Frankly, it's very important that you go through your university education with a "consumer" minded view. Take my field of commerce. There are tens and tens of thousands of students studying what is essentially a semi-vocational course. In this job market it's bloody difficult to get the type of job that most graduates want. Even if you do get that job, most don't pay particularly well. Getting a good job in commerce in this market requires good marks (P's get degrees was a saying invented when significantly less went to uni), significant vocational work experience (often unpaid) and great extra-curriculars. Most students don't realise this until final year university, at which stage it's often too late. If they'd been more consumer minded about how what they did would translate into a job and into earnings at the beginning they wouldn't be left in this situation.

Sure, I would have loved to have done something like liberal arts for a few years like my parents, and lapped up the fantastic uni lifestyle that I was promised throughout schooling. But the reality is, given I don't have a rich mummy and daddy to support me, I simply can't afford to waste earning capacity doing something non-vocational. Nor do I feel it appropriate to ever have the public purse fund my journey of self-discovery whilst I study political economy/philosophy/gender studies (no joke, I'd love to do this. ok maybe not gender studies).

Sorry for the rant, I just wanted to express the view that there wasn't a change in the philosophy of university per se, just a massive change in the numbers attending uni and this had a flow on effect. Universities aren't "run for profit" like standard enterprises. They just need to make enough money to invest in infrastructure and build the uni. There's no fat cats at the top getting mega-rich off students. Tertiary education is hugely expensive and simply can't survive in the way that it used to operate, hence the shedding of fat that we've seen the big unis do in recent years.

 

[tobiasj]

Very interesting discussion on university. It's absolutely bizarre how much time/effort/money we put into education, given that it very infrequently teaches actual skills (unlike a plumbing apprenticeship). Or is it? Relevent article by Bryan Caplan (one of my favourite economists):
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/11/the_magic_of_ed.html

 

[Romp]

Odd question but, out of interest, how do you all get your pants cut, ie fit and slimness in the leg, for

Suit pants

v

Odd trousers and slacks (trousers that you'd press)

v

Non-pressed casual chinos

For me 1 and 2 are about the same, with 3 being a bit slimmer down the leg. I imagine most go for that sort of look. Anyone go the same for all three?

suit pants i get a tad more room in the thigh as im sitting down alot and comfort is important, slight taper and a mid/high rise .. my leg opening is 7.5-8inch

odd trousers fairly similar

cotton trousers perhaps a tad slimmer but you must be careful as it doesnt stretch and "catches" if too slim .. but id probably lower the rise 0.5-1inch depending on the purpose and colour

usually always have a 2inch cuff on all my pants

 

[Romp]

Very interesting discussion on university. It's absolutely bizarre how much time/effort/money we put into education, given that it very infrequently teaches actual skills (unlike a plumbing apprenticeship). Or is it? Relevent article by Bryan Caplan (one of my favourite economists):
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/11/the_magic_of_ed.html

yeah ive found the uni discussion quite interesting - I look at my circle of friends and many of my tradie mates are actually much better off than my uni qualified friends. They seem to be in much more demand, work better hours and make more money

If the main purpose of going to uni to find oneself a vocation it always astounds me the number of people who opt for longer degrees/left field stuff that adds no value when it comes to actually getting a job. I view uni as a stepping stone to get to an interview ... actual experience and know-how will get you paid. So why waste time doing a 5 year degree when a 3 year degree will get you into the same initial job?

Of course there is the argument that there are intellectuals there to broaden knowledge but id say they are the minority

 

[Geoffrey Firmin]



There isn't some sort of neoliberal conspiracy. Public funded university funding is hugely expensive. Whitlam's free university age occured in a very different context, in which the numbers of people going to university were far smaller and the hit on the public purse was vastly smaller. Full public funding of university education in modern times would be impossible and not at all desirable given the masses of people who go to uni.
 
By forcing people to pay for their education (I believe the current split is something like 60/40 to the student), you force students to better choose the profession they will enter. Frankly, it's very important that you go through your university education with a "consumer" minded view. Take my field of commerce. There are tens and tens of thousands of students studying what is essentially a semi-vocational course. In this job market it's bloody difficult to get the type of job that most graduates want. Even if you do get that job, most don't pay particularly well. Getting a good job in commerce in this market requires good marks (P's get degrees was a saying invented when significantly less went to uni), significant vocational work experience (often unpaid) and great extra-curriculars. Most students don't realise this until final year university, at which stage it's often too late. If they'd been more consumer minded about how what they did would translate into a job and into earnings at the beginning they wouldn't be left in this situation.
 
Sure, I would have loved to have done something like liberal arts for a few years like my parents, and lapped up the fantastic uni lifestyle that I was promised throughout schooling. But the reality is, given I don't have a rich mummy and daddy to support me, I simply can't afford to waste earning capacity doing something non-vocational. Nor do I feel it appropriate to ever have the public purse fund my journey of self-discovery whilst I study political economy/philosophy/gender studies (no joke, I'd love to do this. ok maybe not gender studies).
 
Sorry for the rant, I just wanted to express the view that there wasn't a change in the philosophy of university per se, just a massive change in the numbers attending uni and this had a flow on effect. Universities aren't "run for profit" like standard enterprises. They just need to make enough money to invest in infrastructure and build the uni. There's no fat cats at the top getting mega-rich off students. Tertiary education is hugely expensive and simply can't survive in the way that it used to operate, hence the shedding of fat that we've seen the big unis do in recent years.

My turn to rant. First I was not implying there was Neo-con(artist) conspiracy in terms of education. And sorry to rain on your parade there was a big change in the philosophy of university per see caused by the change in economic reality which tightened the public purse strings so more money could be diverted to middle class welfare, defence and that odious black hole labour hire firms whose racketeering is fleecing the public purse. I should know for sadly as a contractor I get X while the hire firm gets a very nice percentage on top of what X they pay me.

And WTF is this about rich mummies and daddies and 'journey of discovery' where pray tell did that enter the conversation? Are you sure we are not talking about some mythical county located in the 60's or was it the 70's called 'Wanking?'

I did a Communications degree which required 20 hours reading a week compared with lawyer friends who attended lectures handed in essays and then crammed prior to exams.

 

[DartagnanRed]

I strongly agree with Sy's comment that there are many people at uni who shouldn't be there. Let me explain.

As I was finishing my schooling there was an expectation (some of which I put on myself and some of which put on me by others) that as I had relatively good marks I would go to university. In my case, this didn't matter as all of the potential career choices which appealed to me involved a tertiary education. However, this pressure/expectation acted very differently on some of the people I knew. Because it was expected that they go to uni, they shunned the potential to study or work elsewhere, particularly in trades. This may be because during their parents time, working in a trade was a lower paid role that was generally had a lower social status. But now we live in a context in which the average blue collar worker earns more than the average white collar worker. Some plumbers in Australia are pulling in over half a million.This is a hugely important thing to remember. In commerce, most think that they're going to be working for some big corporate with great development and advancement prospects, raking in the big bucks. In reality, a few people get well paying jobs which require massive hours and the rest get consigned to low paying, unsatisfying 9-5 jobs with little or zero prospects for advancement. I know people who will end up in this type of role, who had they been a little more supported during school would be loving life learning a trade and working outside.

It's so important to bring up students with the knowledge that they can have fulfilling careers which don't require a university education. Or maybe the answer is to have more pathways from university into tradtionally non-uni jobs.

 

[DartagnanRed]

My turn to rant. First I was not implying there was Neo-con(artist) conspiracy in terms of education. And sorry to rain on your parade there was a big change in the philosophy of university per see caused by the change in economic reality which tightened the public purse strings so more money could be diverted to middle class welfare, defence and that odious black hole labour hire firms whose racketeering is fleecing the public purse. I should know for sadly as a contractor I get X while the hire firm gets a very nice percentage on top of what X they pay me.

And WTF is this about rich mummies and daddies and 'journey of discovery' where pray tell did that enter the conversation? Are you sure we are not talking about some mythical county located in the 60's or was it the 70's called 'Wanking?'

I did a Communications degree which required 20 hours reading a week compared with lawyer friends who attended lectures handed in essays and then crammed prior to exams.

No, you weren't implying a conspiracy but you did refer to the changing consumer nature of university students as an inherently bad thing.

I agree there was a change in the economic reality (I don't see how I suggested otherwise and you are 'raining on my parade').

University isn't being funded the way it is simply because there's fat sitting elsewhere. And I don't mean any disrespect to you, but I'm not sure many would see a key link between the philosophy of university education and the growth (I assume) of contracting firms.

In regards to rich parents: The people I know who are enjoying a similar standard of university education to their parents are only able to do so because they are being supported by wealthy parents. Many of the rest of us are spending minimal time at uni in order to earn money or gain work experience. This wasn't related to anything you said.

Not sure what you wanted to convey about your communications degree. I understand first hand the amount of work that Communications degrees require. They are simply one of the worst degrees in terms of the mix of workload and work experience required in order to get one of the ridiculously small number of jobs available each year. It's now at the stage where students are expected to do several hundreds of hours of strictly unpaid work experience in order to even have a chance at a job.

 

[Geoffrey Firmin]



No, you weren't implying a conspiracy but you did refer to the changing consumer nature of university students as an inherently bad thing.

I agree there was a change in the economic reality (I don't see how I suggested otherwise and you are 'raining on my parade').

University isn't being funded the way it is simply because there's fat sitting elsewhere. And I don't mean any disrespect to you, but I'm not sure many would see a key link between the philosophy of university education and the growth (I assume) of contracting firms.

In regards to rich parents: The people I know who are enjoying a similar standard of university education to their parents are only able to do so because they are being supported by wealthy parents. Many of the rest of us are spending minimal time at uni in order to earn money or gain work experience. This wasn't related to anything you said.

Not sure what you wanted to convey about your communications degree. I understand first hand the amount of work that Communications degrees require. They are simply one of the worst degrees in terms of the mix of workload and work experience required in order to get one of the ridiculously small number of jobs available each year. It's now at the stage where students are expected to do several hundreds of hours of strictly unpaid work experience in order to even have a chance at a job.

The growth of contracting firms which was an impact of 'small government ideology' is a total waste of public money. Sub contracting by the APS wastes millions each year, it was an example of public waste.

Where pray tell is the fat sitting in the University system? Most associate lecturers are overworked and under paid.

The students I taught did not have 'wealthy parents' to support them and in a lot of cases they were the first in their families to go to university. I always found that kids from the private school system expected to be spoon fed and bitched when they did not get the marks they think they deserved. Didn't matter that their work did reflect their ability.

 

[Henry Carter]



yeah ive found the uni discussion quite interesting - I look at my circle of friends and many of my tradie mates are actually much better off than my uni qualified friends. They seem to be in much more demand, work better hours and make more money

If the main purpose of going to uni to find oneself a vocation it always astounds me the number of people who opt for longer degrees/left field stuff that adds no value when it comes to actually getting a job. I view uni as a stepping stone to get to an interview ... actual experience and know-how will get you paid. So why waste time doing a 5 year degree when a 3 year degree will get you into the same initial job?

Of course there is the argument that there are intellectuals there to broaden knowledge but id say they are the minority

Agreed, all the tradies around here are loaded.

My Father in law, ran a scaffolding company for 20 years and worked bloody hard of course, but has no mortgage on both their farm and main house and they live a nice comfortable life. All the builders, plumbers & tilers I know all have more money than I do, and work less. That's life though. My brother in law has just been down in the mines for 6 months, scaffolding too and pulled in the equivalent of about 200k a year while there.

If I had my time again, I'd probably really enjoy being a landscape gardener or something of the sort. I'm obsessed enough with my lawn enough as it is, love the outdoors & there seems to be plenty of this kind of work around (in Canberra anyway).

 

[DartagnanRed]

1) The growth of contracting firms which was an impact of 'small government ideology' is a total waste of public money. Sub contracting by the APS wastes millions each year, it was an example of public waste.

2) Where pray tell is the fat sitting in the University system? Most associate lecturers are overworked and under paid.

3) The students I taught did not have 'wealthy parents' to support them and in a lot of cases they were the first in their families to go to university. I always found that kids from the private school system expected to be spoon fed and bitched when they did not get the marks they think they deserved. Didn't matter that their work did reflect their ability.

1) I'm not sure you can palm "small government ideology" off as a waste of public money. Many would hold the contrary view. Subcontracting as a practice does not necessarily waste money, in face it is designed to do the opposite. This is of course different in practice for many firms whether they be public or private.
2) I'm not sure what you count as "overworked and underpaid." Perhaps they are underpaid, but I doubt the average university lecturer comes close to the hours worked by those in private industry, at least that has certainly been my experience. In terms of fat, I was referring to the way universities were run in times gone by, I appreciate this has changed.
3) I agree that on average this is often true. Many private school kids just don't understand the big bad world out there. In commerce they often expect to have non-junior positions just sitting there for them. They don't appreciate that there are hundreds of thousands of harder working students out there.

 

[The Ernesto]

Let's all become tradies. Of course we'll have to buy some nice new boots that match our P Johnson overalls.

 

[Henry Carter]

^ Presenting Henry Carter's upcoming "tradies collection"

 

[Geoffrey Firmin]



1) I'm not sure you can palm "small government ideology" off as a waste of public money. Many would hold the contrary view. Subcontracting as a practice does not necessarily waste money, in face it is designed to do the opposite. This is of course different in practice for many firms whether they be public or private.
2) I'm not sure what you count as "overworked and underpaid." Perhaps they are underpaid, but I doubt the average university lecturer comes close to the hours worked by those in private industry, at least that has certainly been my experience. In terms of fat, I was referring to the way universities were run in times gone by, I appreciate this has changed.
3) I agree that on average this is often true. Many private school kids just don't understand the big bad world out there. In commerce they often expect to have non-junior positions just sitting there for them. They don't appreciate that there are hundreds of thousands of harder working students out there.

1 Do you know how much money firms such as Hays and Hudson make off the APS a year? And this is not waste?

2 As an associate lecturer your paid for contact hours not time required to prepare a lecture. The ratio is three hours prep equals one hour teaching.

 

[lachyzee]

http://www.theage.com.au/business/r...ustralian-shifts-offshore-20130131-2dm34.html